Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1398591 - upgrade to Fedora25 cannot proceed due to file rpm/macros conflict
Summary: upgrade to Fedora25 cannot proceed due to file rpm/macros conflict
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: rpm
Version: 25
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Igor Gnatenko
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1398742 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-11-25 11:17 UTC by Kamil Konieczny
Modified: 2016-12-07 10:02 UTC (History)
14 users (show)

Fixed In Version: rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25 rpm-4.13.0-6.fc25
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-12-05 21:44:36 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
debugdata (8.89 MB, application/octet-stream)
2016-11-25 11:57 UTC, Kamil Konieczny 		no flags Details
Fix arch-dependent requires in subpackages (RHBZ #1398591) (2.24 KB, patch)
2016-11-25 12:21 UTC, Igor Gnatenko 		no flags Details | Diff
DNF Debug data (9.07 MB, application/x-tar)
2016-11-30 21:03 UTC, James Tomlinson 		no flags Details
View All

Description Kamil Konieczny 2016-11-25 11:17:54 UTC 
Description of problem:

Fedora 24, x86_64, erasing option set due to libkface, not related to bug

dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing

cannot complete job due to error,

file /usr/lib/rpm/macros is in conflict with rpm-4.13.0-4.fc25.i686 and rpm-4.13.0-4.fc25.x86_64

is it due to both i686 and x86_64 rpm packets 
are present in upgrade x86_64 image ?

Exact error message (contains Polish words) from dnf.log:

Nov 24 22:20:50 CRITICAL Błąd: Transaction check error:
  plik /usr/lib/rpm/macros jest w konflikcie między instalowanymi rpm-4.13.0-4.fc25.i686 i rpm-4.13.0-4.fc25.x86_64

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. enter console, su to root
2. dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:
Comment 1 Panu Matilainen 2016-11-25 11:40:05 UTC 
Main rpm package is NOT supposed to be available in arch flavors, that is a distro compose bug. OTOH I dont know why dnf would try to pull in the i686 version anyway.

Not a bug in rpm though, its only doing its job by detecting the conflict.
Comment 2 Igor Gnatenko 2016-11-25 11:41:37 UTC 
dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=25 --allowerasing --debugsolver

and attach "debugdata" directory
Comment 3 Kamil Konieczny 2016-11-25 11:57:45 UTC 
Created attachment 1224229 [details]
debugdata
Comment 4 Igor Gnatenko 2016-11-25 12:08:51 UTC 
* rpm-libs-4.13.0-1.fc24.i686@system has Req: rpm = 4.13.0-1.fc24
* rpm-libs-4.13.0-4.fc25.i686@updates has Req: rpm(x86-32) = 4.13.0-4.fc25
Comment 5 Panu Matilainen 2016-11-25 12:16:09 UTC 
Oh. That also explains why rpm.i686 package got pulled into the x86_64 distro compose and everything. Ugh.
Comment 6 Igor Gnatenko 2016-11-25 12:21:13 UTC 
Created attachment 1224248 [details]
Fix arch-dependent requires in subpackages (RHBZ #1398591)

Signed-off-by: Igor Gnatenko <ignatenko>
Comment 7 Panu Matilainen 2016-11-25 12:33:17 UTC 
Looks ok to me, feel free fix for rawhide + f25 (including pushing an update).
Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2016-11-25 12:55:01 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-da15ae43d0
Comment 9 Igor Gnatenko 2016-11-25 18:30:36 UTC 
*** Bug 1398742 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2016-11-27 22:59:12 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-da15ae43d0
Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2016-11-30 05:29:44 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 12 James Tomlinson 2016-11-30 21:02:26 UTC 
The problem remains for me with exactly the same command as OP.

Error Summary
-------------

Nov 30 20:54:12 CRITICAL Error: Transaction check error:
  file /usr/lib/rpm/macros conflicts between attempted installs of rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25.i686 and rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25.x86_64
Comment 13 James Tomlinson 2016-11-30 21:03:44 UTC 
Created attachment 1226508 [details]
DNF Debug data
Comment 14 Loïc GRENON 2016-12-03 10:55:40 UTC 
I had the same problem, even with rpm-4.13.0-5.fc25
However, removing all installed rpm-*-i686 packages solves the problem.

Hope this might help.
Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2016-12-03 12:42:29 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-6.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b7a95f6a89
Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2016-12-04 08:08:03 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-6.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-b7a95f6a89
Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2016-12-05 21:44:36 UTC 
rpm-4.13.0-6.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 18 Kamil Konieczny 2016-12-07 10:02:25 UTC 
Thank you, upgrade worked.

Can you describe what you corrected ?

There are some more 32-bit packets mixed into 64-bit intel platform,
so your notes can help others to improve.

Regards,
Kamil
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.